ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2021
Intervention in anaphylaxis: the experience of one paediatric centre based on NORA reports.
Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of paediatric anaphylaxis: evaluation of clinical practice according to the 2024 Polish Paediatric Society guidelines.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2026Article
- The 2020 update on anaphylaxis in paediatric population.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2022Review
- Is the clinical manifestation of anaphylaxis in children influenced by the trigger of reaction?Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intramuscular adrenaline administration is the primary intervention in anaphylaxis. Aim: To analyse the data on intervention in children admitted due to anaphylaxis to the tertiary paediatric centre and compare them to the data from the Network for Online-Registration of Anaphylaxis. Material and methods: A validated structured on-line questionnaire was used to collect data concerning the first and second-line intervention in anaphylaxis. The study was conducted in cooperation with the European Anaphylaxis Registry. Results: The study group comprised 114 children (76 boys, 66.87%) aged 5 months-17 years with the predominance of moderate-to-severe anaphylaxis (grade III in Ring and Messmer's, and grade IV in Mueller's scale). In 103 (90.4%) children the first line of medical intervention was provided by medical staff. In the first-line intervention 39 (34.8%) children were given adrenaline. Five (4.4%) children were given the second dose of adrenaline and were admitted to the intensive care unit. In the second-line intervention adrenaline was given to 12 (15.6%) children. In one third it was at least the second reaction to the same trigger. Children treated with adrenaline were older (9.3 ±4.8 years), in comparison to those not treated (7.3 ±4.6 years, Conclusions: There is a strong need to continue education on proper management of anaphylaxis in children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.